Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Sorry to post this anonymously, but I fear my alt has been "compromised." In the last week, I have been selected Editor-in-Chief of a secondary journal at my law school. It is not a start-up journal; it's been around for 30+ years and has been the "de facto" second-best to law review at my T20 school (or so the outgoing 3Ls from last year told me). I already have a summer associate coming up at a V100 and am pretty content with my post grad plans. I had no intention of pursuing a clerkship, but in the last few days, I've been doing some debating.

Here's the question: does anyone know how this new position will be viewed by judges? In relation to the law review boys and girls, does my ranking position stack up against them? Or is it worth nil?

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:Worth more than nil, but basically never equivalent to LR. Consider it the best journal credential you can get that isn't LR. IMO, for really high-end clerkships, EIC is sometimes the only position on secondary journals worth pursuing. Not an absolute rule, of course...

Thanks; that helps. I'm just trying to gauge whether or not I actually want to pursue the clerkship route. I'm dealing with a few conflicting resume items. On the one hand, I'm only about top 20% and not on LR or moot court; I'm content with these facts, but I know they're not clerkship material. At the same time, now I have this EIC thing and a V100 SA position as line items on my resume. Who knows...

Does EIC of a secondary become more worthwhile as you go up the rankings? Are top secondaries at HYS or CCN "good enough" for good clerkships if you didn't make/don't do Law Review?

I'm still confused as to why LR is so prized over top secondary journals. It's not grade-based anymore, and a regular editor of LR at my school does far less work than a board member of one of our well-known secondary journals.

Anonymous User wrote:Does EIC of a secondary become more worthwhile as you go up the rankings? Are top secondaries at HYS or CCN "good enough" for good clerkships if you didn't make/don't do Law Review?

I'm still confused as to why LR is so prized over top secondary journals. It's not grade-based anymore, and a regular editor of LR at my school does far less work than a board member of one of our well-known secondary journals.

The key for clerkships, if you didn't make law review, is to focus on getting good grades. You won't be able to beat somebody on law review (who has similar or better grades) just by being EIC of a secondary. But, if your grades are better than the guy on law review, then I think you have a decent shot of being competitive for the clerkship.

Anonymous User wrote:Does EIC of a secondary become more worthwhile as you go up the rankings? Are top secondaries at HYS or CCN "good enough" for good clerkships if you didn't make/don't do Law Review?

I'm still confused as to why LR is so prized over top secondary journals. It's not grade-based anymore, and a regular editor of LR at my school does far less work than a board member of one of our well-known secondary journals.

The key for clerkships, if you didn't make law review, is to focus on getting good grades. You won't be able to beat somebody on law review (who has similar or better grades) just by being EIC of a secondary. But, if your grades are better than the guy on law review, then I think you have a decent shot of being competitive for the clerkship.

I mean no disrespect, and have a hunch you're right for the most part, but are you speaking as someone who has already gone through the clerkship application process? Profs at my T6 have told me that the hierarchy is:

E-board of LR > E-board of a major secondary > LR > E-board of a minor secondary > just being on a run-of-the-mill secondary.

It wouldn't surprise me were they wrong, but a few are very young and have recently been through the clerkship process.

G. T. L. Rev wrote:FWIW, I think Brasky is mostly right, and your profs are mostly wrong. There will be some exceptions, as not all judges care about journal or view it in the same light as their peers. And in the case of some very highly regarded secondaries (Stanford Technology Law Review, Harvard JLPP, etc.), maybe EIC of the secondary might be slightly better than LR with no board at the same school. But those are narrow carve-outs, to the extent they are carve-outs at all.

For my judge, no secondary position will ever be better than LR, and generally we want a top board position from a top school's LR. This is not to say that LR is an absolute prerequisite, but rather that it is just an important factor.

This is the same as I've experienced. When someone doesn't make LR board, then he/she will usually end up on the board of a 2dary journal. This doesn't even factor in the difference in work required, which can be surprisingly large between the LR and a 2dary journal, even at better schools.

G. T. L. Rev wrote:FWIW, I think Brasky is mostly right, and your profs are mostly wrong. There will be some exceptions, as not all judges care about journal or view it in the same light as their peers. And in the case of some very highly regarded secondaries (Stanford Technology Law Review, Harvard JLPP, etc.), maybe EIC of the secondary might be slightly better than LR with no board at the same school. But those are narrow carve-outs, to the extent they are carve-outs at all.

For my judge, no secondary position will ever be better than LR, and generally we want a top board position from a top school's LR. This is not to say that LR is an absolute prerequisite, but rather that it is just an important factor.

This is the same as I've experienced. When someone doesn't make LR board, then he/she will usually end up on the board of a 2dary journal. This doesn't even factor in the difference in work required, which can be surprisingly large between the LR and a 2dary journal, even at better schools.

CDO at BU said no matter your grades are, if not LR then a lot of judges won't even look at your resume. Think of it this way, judges get swamped with applications and sorting people by 1). connections (calls, etc) 2) School 3) Grades 4) LR. Also, whoever said a secondary journal is almost as much work as LR must go to an odd school. At BU, the EIC of a secondary probably does the samne amount of work as a LR 2L. For some of the 2ndary journals, EIC is less work than a 2L.

G. T. L. Rev wrote:FWIW, I think Brasky is mostly right, and your profs are mostly wrong. There will be some exceptions, as not all judges care about journal or view it in the same light as their peers. And in the case of some very highly regarded secondaries (Stanford Technology Law Review, Harvard JLPP, etc.), maybe EIC of the secondary might be slightly better than LR with no board at the same school. But those are narrow carve-outs, to the extent they are carve-outs at all.

For my judge, no secondary position will ever be better than LR, and generally we want a top board position from a top school's LR. This is not to say that LR is an absolute prerequisite, but rather that it is just an important factor.

This is the same as I've experienced. When someone doesn't make LR board, then he/she will usually end up on the board of a 2dary journal. This doesn't even factor in the difference in work required, which can be surprisingly large between the LR and a 2dary journal, even at better schools.

CDO at BU said no matter your grades are, if not LR then a lot of judges won't even look at your resume. Think of it this way, judges get swamped with applications and sorting people by 1). connections (calls, etc) 2) School 3) Grades 4) LR. Also, whoever said a secondary journal is almost as much work as LR must go to an odd school. At BU, the EIC of a secondary probably does the samne amount of work as a LR 2L. For some of the 2ndary journals, EIC is less work than a 2L.

My secondary journal is actually more work than LR at my school--and this fact is well-known and acknowledged by students.

G. T. L. Rev wrote:FWIW, I think Brasky is mostly right, and your profs are mostly wrong. There will be some exceptions, as not all judges care about journal or view it in the same light as their peers. And in the case of some very highly regarded secondaries (Stanford Technology Law Review, Harvard JLPP, etc.), maybe EIC of the secondary might be slightly better than LR with no board at the same school. But those are narrow carve-outs, to the extent they are carve-outs at all.

For my judge, no secondary position will ever be better than LR, and generally we want a top board position from a top school's LR. This is not to say that LR is an absolute prerequisite, but rather that it is just an important factor.

This is the same as I've experienced. When someone doesn't make LR board, then he/she will usually end up on the board of a 2dary journal. This doesn't even factor in the difference in work required, which can be surprisingly large between the LR and a 2dary journal, even at better schools.

CDO at BU said no matter your grades are, if not LR then a lot of judges won't even look at your resume. Think of it this way, judges get swamped with applications and sorting people by 1). connections (calls, etc) 2) School 3) Grades 4) LR. Also, whoever said a secondary journal is almost as much work as LR must go to an odd school. At BU, the EIC of a secondary probably does the samne amount of work as a LR 2L. For some of the 2ndary journals, EIC is less work than a 2L.

My secondary journal is actually more work than LR at my school--and this fact is well-known and acknowledged by students.

G. T. L. Rev wrote:FWIW, I think Brasky is mostly right, and your profs are mostly wrong. There will be some exceptions, as not all judges care about journal or view it in the same light as their peers. And in the case of some very highly regarded secondaries (Stanford Technology Law Review, Harvard JLPP, etc.), maybe EIC of the secondary might be slightly better than LR with no board at the same school. But those are narrow carve-outs, to the extent they are carve-outs at all.

For my judge, no secondary position will ever be better than LR, and generally we want a top board position from a top school's LR. This is not to say that LR is an absolute prerequisite, but rather that it is just an important factor.

This is the same as I've experienced. When someone doesn't make LR board, then he/she will usually end up on the board of a 2dary journal. This doesn't even factor in the difference in work required, which can be surprisingly large between the LR and a 2dary journal, even at better schools.

CDO at BU said no matter your grades are, if not LR then a lot of judges won't even look at your resume. Think of it this way, judges get swamped with applications and sorting people by 1). connections (calls, etc) 2) School 3) Grades 4) LR. Also, whoever said a secondary journal is almost as much work as LR must go to an odd school. At BU, the EIC of a secondary probably does the samne amount of work as a LR 2L. For some of the 2ndary journals, EIC is less work than a 2L.

My secondary journal is actually more work than LR at my school--and this fact is well-known and acknowledged by students.

I don't have much to contribute to this discussion generally, as for most judges there is very little difference between EIC of a secondary and run of the mill LR member--your grades (and recommendations!) are going to matter far more. However, I just wanted to note that the most "prestigious" secondary at SLS is generally considered to be SLPR (Stanford Law and Policy Review), not STLR (although STLR is pretty decent). After SLPR, all of the journals are pretty much interchangeable, although the animal law journal is still new and very small.

Remember, too, that at least at SLS, LR and ed-board of secondary journal are not mutually exclusive. E.g., several recent presidents of SLR were the managing editor of SLPR during their 2L year, and several LR members that I can recall were also EICs of secondary journals.